Prosecution Insights
Last updated: April 17, 2026
Application No. 18/416,695

Sport Handle Bottom - External Utility Mount

Final Rejection §102§112
Filed
Jan 18, 2024
Examiner
STONER, KILEY SHAWN
Art Unit
1735
Tech Center
1700 — Chemical & Materials Engineering
Assignee
unknown
OA Round
2 (Final)
81%
Grant Probability
Favorable
3-4
OA Rounds
2y 2m
To Grant
96%
With Interview

Examiner Intelligence

Grants 81% — above average
81%
Career Allow Rate
1148 granted / 1418 resolved
+16.0% vs TC avg
Strong +16% interview lift
Without
With
+15.5%
Interview Lift
resolved cases with interview
Typical timeline
2y 2m
Avg Prosecution
48 currently pending
Career history
1466
Total Applications
across all art units

Statute-Specific Performance

§101
0.1%
-39.9% vs TC avg
§103
44.7%
+4.7% vs TC avg
§102
30.3%
-9.7% vs TC avg
§112
20.3%
-19.7% vs TC avg
Black line = Tech Center average estimate • Based on career data from 1418 resolved cases

Office Action

§102 §112
DETAILED ACTION Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA . Drawings New corrected drawings in compliance with 37 CFR 1.121(d) are required in this application because submitted drawn is illegible. Applicant is advised to employ the services of a competent patent draftsperson outside the Office, as the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office no longer prepares new drawings. The corrected drawings are required in reply to the Office action to avoid abandonment of the application. The requirement for corrected drawings will not be held in abeyance. Claim Objections Claims 1-3 are objected to because of the following informalities: Claims 1-3 contain multiple sentences, and lack a transition word such as “comprising”, “consisting”, or “consisting essentially of”. Appropriate correction is required. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 112 The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112(b): (b) CONCLUSION.—The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor regards as the invention. The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph: The specification shall conclude with one or more claims particularly pointing out and distinctly claiming the subject matter which the applicant regards as his invention. Claims 1-3 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 112(b) or 35 U.S.C. 112 (pre-AIA ), second paragraph, as being indefinite for failing to particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which the inventor or a joint inventor (or for applications subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 112, the applicant), regards as the invention. The claim(s) are narrative in form and replete with indefinite language. The structure which goes to make up the device must be clearly and positively specified. The structure must be organized and correlated in such a manner as to present a complete operative device. The claim(s) must be in one sentence form only. Note the format of the claims in the patent(s) cited. Section 2100 of the MPEP also provides valuable insight into claim language. The claims are indefinite because they fail to point out what is included or excluded by the claim language. This claim is an omnibus type claim. Regarding claims 1-2, the phrase "such as" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). Regarding claims 1-2, the phrase "typically renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). In claim 1 it is unclear what is meant by the limitation “any other type of adhering.” For purposed of examination the broadest reasonable interpretation has been applied. In claim 2 the limitation “as desired and as described above and below” is unclear. Regarding claim 2, the phrase "It does not necessarily need to be" renders the claim indefinite because it is unclear whether the limitations following the phrase are part of the claimed invention. See MPEP § 2173.05(d). In claim 2 the limitation “may wish” is unclear and indefinite. The term “many kinds” in claim 2 a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “many kinds” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The metes and bounds of “many kinds” is unclear. The term “any way” in claim 2 a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “any way” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The metes and bounds of “any way” is unclear. The term “keepsake trinkets/collectibles” in claim 2 a relative term which renders the claim indefinite. The term “keepsake trinkets/collectibles” is not defined by the claim, the specification does not provide a standard for ascertaining the requisite degree, and one of ordinary skill in the art would not be reasonably apprised of the scope of the invention. The metes and bounds of “keepsake trinkets/collectibles” is unclear. In claim 3 the limitation “conceptually conceived” is unclear and indefinite. In claim 3 the limitation “AKA” is unclear and indefinite. In claim 3 the limitation “Please note” is unclear and indefinite. In claim 3 the limitation “as described above” is unclear and indefinite. Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 102 In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis (i.e., changing from AIA to pre-AIA ) for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status. The following is a quotation of the appropriate paragraphs of 35 U.S.C. 102 that form the basis for the rejections under this section made in this Office action: A person shall be entitled to a patent unless – (a)(1) the claimed invention was patented, described in a printed publication, or in public use, on sale, or otherwise available to the public before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. (a)(2) the claimed invention was described in a patent issued under section 151, or in an application for patent published or deemed published under section 122(b), in which the patent or application, as the case may be, names another inventor and was effectively filed before the effective filing date of the claimed invention. Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Attenni (US 4,591,156). With respect to claim 1, Attenni teaches the Sport Handle Bottom - External Utility mount is a specifically designed utility apparatus which attaches to the butt end or flat butt end of sport handles of any kind - such as but not limited to: rackets; i.e. tennis, badminton, and racquetball rackets. Paddles; i.e. pickleball, beach, paddleball, and ping pong paddles. Bats; i.e. softball, baseball, cricket, stickball and wiffle ball bats. Sticks; i.e. lacrosse, hockey, and billiard sticks. Curling brooms. Bikes and scooters; i.e. any kind of manually powered or motorized bike and scooter. Ski poles, fishing rods, and golf clubs, or any other sport handle bottom not listed here. The Sport Handle Bottom - External Utility Mount is a threaded metal, or plastic round hollow receptor tube which is to be used as a female receptor for further connecting to any other sport handle apparatus or accessory. It can be attached by a supporting cap (made of any flexible material, typically silicone, rubber or TPU) that can hold the receptor tube to the butt end or flat butt end of sport handles of any kind by being screwed, glued, or any other type of adhering substance or device that would secure it to the flat butt end of a sport handle (figures 1, 2, and 8; and column 1, line 53-column 2, line 59). With respect to claim 2, Attenni teaches the utility patent is for attaching an external utility mount to any sport handle bottom for which a player or user decides to attach any other apparatus or accessory as desired and as described above and below. It does not necessarily need to be a Cap and/or receptor tube that enables someone to attach any apparatus or accessory to the flat butt end of a sport handle. Users / Players may wish to accessorize sport handle bottoms of many kinds whereby the sport handle users who wish to connect any other type of apparatus or accessory designed to benefit the sport player in any way including obtaining any kind of mental and/or physical benefit, or positive reassurance. Attaching apparatus or accessories such as but not limited to: training equipment, small weights (less than 1 ounce), ball pickup assistant equipment, hooks, bands, rings, design tags, or string/rope for hanging or carrying accessory decor and keepsake trinkets/collectibles, or fashion paraphernalia, and more - all of which can be used in conjunction with the Sport Handle Bottom - External Utility Mount (figures 1, 2, and 8; and column 1, line 53-column 2, line 59). With respect to claim 3, Attenni teaches the Sport Handle Bottom - External Utility Mount is conceptually conceived and uniquely designed to attach to the external sport handles bottom (AKA butt end or flat butt end of the handle). Please note, the Sport Handle Bottom - External Utility Mount can be built into or inside the sport handle, or just below the external surface of the sport handle bottom (butt end). Once again, the Sport Handle Bottom - External Utility Mount is intended to be used in conjunction with other player desired apparatus and/or accessories as described above (figures 1, 2, and 8; and column 1, line 53-column 2, line 59). Claim(s) 1-3 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(1) as being anticipated by Burger (US 2,508,812). With respect to claim 1, Burger teaches the Sport Handle Bottom - External Utility mount is a specifically designed utility apparatus which attaches to the butt end or flat butt end of sport handles of any kind - such as but not limited to: rackets; i.e. tennis, badminton, and racquetball rackets. Paddles; i.e. pickleball, beach, paddleball, and ping pong paddles. Bats; i.e. softball, baseball, cricket, stickball and wiffle ball bats. Sticks; i.e. lacrosse, hockey, and billiard sticks. Curling brooms. Bikes and scooters; i.e. any kind of manually powered or motorized bike and scooter. Ski poles, fishing rods, and golf clubs, or any other sport handle bottom not listed here. The Sport Handle Bottom - External Utility Mount is a threaded metal, or plastic round hollow receptor tube which is to be used as a female receptor for further connecting to any other sport handle apparatus or accessory. It can be attached by a supporting cap (made of any flexible material, typically silicone, rubber or TPU) that can hold the receptor tube to the butt end or flat butt end of sport handles of any kind by being screwed, glued, or any other type of adhering substance or device that would secure it to the flat butt end of a sport handle (figures 1-4; and column 1, line 1-column 3, line 8). With respect to claim 2, Burger teaches the utility patent is for attaching an external utility mount to any sport handle bottom for which a player or user decides to attach any other apparatus or accessory as desired and as described above and below. It does not necessarily need to be a Cap and/or receptor tube that enables someone to attach any apparatus or accessory to the flat butt end of a sport handle. Users / Players may wish to accessorize sport handle bottoms of many kinds whereby the sport handle users who wish to connect any other type of apparatus or accessory designed to benefit the sport player in any way including obtaining any kind of mental and/or physical benefit, or positive reassurance. Attaching apparatus or accessories such as but not limited to: training equipment, small weights (less than 1 ounce), ball pickup assistant equipment, hooks, bands, rings, design tags, or string/rope for hanging or carrying accessory decor and keepsake trinkets/collectibles, or fashion paraphernalia, and more - all of which can be used in conjunction with the Sport Handle Bottom - External Utility Mount (figures 1-4; and column 1, line 1-column 3, line 8). With respect to claim 3, Burger teaches the Sport Handle Bottom - External Utility Mount is conceptually conceived and uniquely designed to attach to the external sport handles bottom (AKA butt end or flat butt end of the handle). Please note, the Sport Handle Bottom - External Utility Mount can be built into or inside the sport handle, or just below the external surface of the sport handle bottom (butt end). Once again, the Sport Handle Bottom - External Utility Mount is intended to be used in conjunction with other player desired apparatus and/or accessories as described above (figures 1-4; and column 1, line 1-column 3, line 8). Conclusion Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to KILEY SHAWN STONER whose telephone number is (571)272-1183. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday-Thursday. Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice. If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Keith Walker can be reached on 571-272-3458. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300. Information regarding the status of an application may be obtained from the Patent Application Information Retrieval (PAIR) system. Status information for published applications may be obtained from either Private PAIR or Public PAIR. Status information for unpublished applications is available through Private PAIR only. For more information about the PAIR system, see http://pair-direct.uspto.gov. Should you have questions on access to the Private PAIR system, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative or access to the automated information system, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000. /KILEY S STONER/ Primary Examiner, Art Unit 1735
Read full office action

Prosecution Timeline

Jan 18, 2024
Application Filed
Jan 26, 2026
Non-Final Rejection — §102, §112
Mar 03, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 03, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 10, 2026
Examiner Interview Summary
Mar 10, 2026
Applicant Interview (Telephonic)
Mar 17, 2026
Response Filed
Apr 09, 2026
Final Rejection — §102, §112 (current)

Precedent Cases

Applications granted by this same examiner with similar technology

Patent 12599986
ULTRASONIC HORN, SECONDARY BATTERY, AND METHOD FOR MANUFACTURING SECONDARY BATTERY
2y 5m to grant Granted Apr 14, 2026
Patent 12592621
COLD PRESSURE WELDING APPARATUS, COIL MANUFACTURING APPARATUS, COIL, AND METHOD OF MANUFACTURING THE SAME
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589453
ORBITAL WELDING DEVICE WITH IMPROVED RESIDUAL OXYGEN MEASUREMENT
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12589446
WIRE-FEED FRICTION STIR ADDITIVE MANUFACTURING SYSTEMS, DEVICES, AND METHODS
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 31, 2026
Patent 12583062
Welding Apparatus, Welding Method, and Electrode Assembly
2y 5m to grant Granted Mar 24, 2026
Study what changed to get past this examiner. Based on 5 most recent grants.

AI Strategy Recommendation

Get an AI-powered prosecution strategy using examiner precedents, rejection analysis, and claim mapping.
Powered by AI — typically takes 5-10 seconds

Prosecution Projections

3-4
Expected OA Rounds
81%
Grant Probability
96%
With Interview (+15.5%)
2y 2m
Median Time to Grant
Moderate
PTA Risk
Based on 1418 resolved cases by this examiner. Grant probability derived from career allow rate.

Sign in for Full Analysis

Enter your email to receive a magic link. No password needed.

Free tier: 3 strategy analyses per month